Home » CleanTech Bites » WA’s battery storage “ban”: Regulator says don’t blame us

WA’s battery storage “ban”: Regulator says don’t blame us

The main energy regulatory body in Western Australia says it is not to blame for the apparent ban on battery storage and electric vehicles in the state, saying there is nothing stopping the government-owned utilities from allowing such installations.

A major fracas has erupted in WA since it emerged that households were effectively banned from installing battery storage and EVs with their rooftop solar arrays.

wa rooftop solar

The state-owned retailer Synergy, and the state-owned grid operator Western Power, quickly pointed the finger to rules imposed by the Economic Regulation Authority.

And this was followed up by energy minister Mike Nahan, who described the rules as “red tape gone mad” and promised last week that they would be gone within a month after discussions with the ERA, Synergy and Western Power.

But the ERA this week said that there was nothing in the regulations to prevent Synergy or Western Power waving through battery storage and EVs if they wanted to.

The ERA says that when it set the guidelines for the so-called “reference services” for the  2013-17 period for customers with bi-directional energy flows (i.e. those with rooftop solar and sending electricity back into the grid), it excluded those with battery storage and EVs.

It said that, at the time, it concluded that “more detailed consideration” was needed before a reference service that catered for batteries and electric vehicles could be approved.

But it says such services could still be offered to users as “non-reference service” if there was demand. “That remains the case today,” a spokesperson for the ERA told RenewEconomy via email this week.

“Neither the regulations nor the ERA hinder Synergy and Western Power from agreeing to a battery storage or electric vehicle service that can be offered to consumers. It is up to Synergy and Western Power to negotiate. The ERA has no role in such negotiations.”

rsz_shutterstock_174922580Nahan has indicated that rooftop solar will continue to roll out quickly on the state’s homes and businesses, and predicts that battery storage will also be popular; and Synergy plans to roll out a battery storage offering next year, to keep pace with Alinta Energy. But he said that battery storage was still “not competitive.”

This issue was take up by WA Greens MLC Robin Chapple, who said research from Curtin University suggests that the cost of combined battery storage and solar systems is already at grid parity for much of regional Western Australia.

“Nahan’s comments that batteries are not commercial is a fabrication to cover up his department’s slow response to this emerging technology,” he said in an emailed statement.

“This kind of rhetoric is unproductive; Synergy and Horizon have an obligation to provide cheaper power to their customer’s and for regional WA that time is right now.”

And for the pundits, here is some more information from the ERA about the regulations:

“As is set out in the Electricity Networks Access Code 2004 (Access Code), Western Power and Synergy can negotiate an access contract based on any service and terms at any time. The starting point for these negotiations is usually the reference services approved in the access arrangement.

“These reference services are the services an arbitrator would look to when seeking to settle an access dispute. Western Power has an obligation to offer at least the reference services and must use all reasonable endeavours to accommodate Synergy’s or any other network user’s requirements in relation to an access contract (see section 2.4A and 2.7 of the Access Code).

“Although there may need to be direct contact between the customer and Western Power in relation to physical connection arrangements, all contractual and pricing arrangements are between Synergy and Western Power. The ERA is not required to be involved in the negotiation of non-reference services.”

Comments

26 responses to “WA’s battery storage “ban”: Regulator says don’t blame us”

  1. Jacob Avatar
    Jacob

    How do the electricity retailers know if a voter has an EV at home?

    And do retailers even have the right to know.

    1. R P Avatar
      R P

      I know of at least three households that have a completely separate power system to the grid. Their power system is based on a 24Volt supply.
      They are still on the grid to receive the “other, original” solar system payments from the power company. Their system was inspected by supply company and nothing illegal was found.

      1. Jacob Avatar
        Jacob

        So is the 24V system off grid?

        1. R P Avatar
          R P

          Yes, totally off grid.

    2. Vickie Roach Avatar
      Vickie Roach

      We have to stop letting these clowns tell us what we can and cannot do! There is only one rule – do no harm…

  2. Beat Odermatt Avatar
    Beat Odermatt

    There seems to be a total lack of basic ethics across many energy companies.

    1. MaxG Avatar
      MaxG

      Correction: across many corporations 🙂

      1. Beat Odermatt Avatar
        Beat Odermatt

        Correction noted. In South Australia we have SA Power Network trying to impose a pro-carbon tax on solar households in order to INCREASE carbon emission. I am sure that even a lizard drinking could not go as low as this!

    2. JeffJL Avatar
      JeffJL

      It just depends upon what your ethics are Beat.

      Basic ethics for a company is profit and shareholder returns. In fact, by law, companies have to put shareholder returns first.

      1. Beat Odermatt Avatar
        Beat Odermatt

        Lying and cheating are NEVER part of good management. A good company has good managers and provides sustainable results to shareholders, customers and wider society. Causing permanent environmental damage and damaging peoples health is within the spectrum of nihilistic psychopath.

        1. JeffJL Avatar
          JeffJL

          Once again you are using your ethics as the base. What makes your ethics better than the other persons?

          I can see a need for lying in management (deceiving the competition). Cheating no. I too have similar ethics to you in how a company should be run (I think). Ethics is one of those throw away sayings like common sense. Or one of the irregular verbs from Yes Minister (I am eccentric, you are mad). It needs to be spelt out so that nobody can claim to be working off different assumptions/base lines.

          1. Beat Odermatt Avatar
            Beat Odermatt

            No, there are some actions which are unethical in any society. This includes lying, cheating, causing harm to humans, animals and the environment. There is “good” and “bad” in this world and a company which lies to the public and causes environmental harm can be regarded as “bad”. Sadly we have seen the emergence of a culture where unethical behaviour by companies has become accepted.

      2. Macabre Avatar
        Macabre

        This is widely believed but actually a myth.

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/harold-meyerson-the-myth-of-maximizing-shareholder-value/2014/02/11/00cdfb14-9336-11e3-84e1-27626c5ef5fb_story.html

        Directors must act in the interests of shareholders rather than in their own interests, but there is no obligation to maximise returns. In any event, maximising short term returns runs the risk of destroying long term value – through undermining goodwill and brand value. In this particular case customer loyalty is at risk.

        1. JeffJL Avatar
          JeffJL

          I’ll concede that point. (With the caveat that I am in Australia and am not too sure of the law here).

    3. Miles Harding Avatar
      Miles Harding

      Hi Beat,
      I think the problem is not so much ethics as goals and obligations.

      The corporate sector is bound to provide annual shareholder returns, not to provide for the common good or future. The result is a financial system that optimises dollars to the detriment if all else, including the basic resources we depend on for our survival.

      This observation also explains why the conservative “small government” mantra is so dangerous to civilization. It really means privatised government, supported by the public purse with the rules being written by the corporations, for their own benefit.

      1. Beat Odermatt Avatar
        Beat Odermatt

        Miles
        Only weak corporations led by weak people need to lie and cheat. Good corporations have true leaders with vision and plans and will succeed. Losers cheat, winner win!

      2. Beat Odermatt Avatar
        Beat Odermatt

        We don’t need a BIG Government and huge Public Service to manage a country. We need laws to ensure that corporate crooks go where they belong.

  3. Andrew_Nichols Avatar
    Andrew_Nichols

    What a load of bollocks in an over regulated country. Pure panic from energy retailers and their cronies in govt.

    1. JeffJL Avatar
      JeffJL

      The issue is not over regulation Andrew. It is under regulation.

      It is the companies telling the government (and hence the people) what to do and hence boosting the companies bottom lines.

  4. Alistair Spong Avatar
    Alistair Spong

    Western power /synergy are obliged to compensate customers for loss of power supply after a certain time – I think it’s 24 hrs – might they also be liable for limiting a customers choice that has cost the customer more by forcing them to have higher electricity use?
    It seems that the system has been gamed with rules that don’t exist and those responsible should accept blame.

  5. MaxG Avatar
    MaxG

    The only one proper response is: do not vote for any party which wants to sell or lease public assets.

  6. Andrew Woodroffe Avatar
    Andrew Woodroffe

    In other words, there is no actual ban, and with a bit of patience and perseverance, a householder may be able to install a bidirectional battery if they so wish. May need a test case, though.

    A better question is who subsides the behind the meter batteries (BMB)? Reserve Capacity Markets suggest a rate $120/kW for peak demand periods. This ought to be paid for by Synergy, the gentailer, as they are the ones paying out this $120/kW.
    Western Power networks also benefit, depending on where the storage is, as storage can also help defer, indefinitely, network upgrades. Perhaps some of that one billion West Australian dollars WP is spending this year would be better spent on subsidizing BMB? As network operators, they cannot ‘own’ generation which what batteries are when discharging, but by leveraging homeowner capital, they can still help out.

    1. greenjenny Avatar
      greenjenny

      Would Josh’s House be the test case you’re after? They’ve just connected up a grid connected battery storage system.

  7. Frank Russell Avatar
    Frank Russell

    fuck he electricity retailers. The sooner everyone is off the grid and these parasites are history the better.

    1. JeffJL Avatar
      JeffJL

      No. If everybody went off the grid there would be a huge over investment in power production. We just need the retailers and produces to have different targets.. i.e. get paid to reduce electricity emissions intensity and lower the peak.

  8. Miles Harding Avatar
    Miles Harding

    Giles, excellent reporting of the WA debacle over numerous stories.

    It’s surprising how much cover this idiocy in the west has got over the weeks.

    If no other links in the suppy chain have an issue with either batteries or EVs, the issues must be purely within the retailer. It is apparent that Synergy really doesn’t like anything that interferes with their view that the customer is there to serve Synergy, which makes it one of the most backward operations I have seen. Cause within itself to consider exiting the grid.

    Hubris has to be one of the most dangerous traits to be seen. It has allowed the state government to get the WA energy supply into a total mess.
    (See here: https://reneweconomy.wpengine.com/2013/wa-slips-back-dark-ages-revives-old-coal-36951 )
    There was another story at the same time that explained that the coal miners supplying MUJA were going broke, despite being reasonably well managed, because of the low price and declining coal quality in the Collie region. This made the “upgrade” of the end of life power station all the more surprising.

    The WA energy minister, Mike Nahan, has been reported here: https://reneweconomy.wpengine.com/2015/w-a-says-solar-is-the-future-as-it-prepares-to-dump-coal-63324 and here: https://reneweconomy.wpengine.com/2015/wa-to-go-solar-may-be-the-only-way-out-of-energy-mess-45847 saying that WA’s future is solar. It’s a dramatic change to his 2013 views and makes him one of the more forward thinking politicians in government these days.

    Over the next 15 years, some 80% of the state’s generating capacity will be due for replacement, making a transition plan that chooses a sustainable path over continuation of fossil fuel dependency immediately necessary. Business as usual costs are increasing, so such a transition is likely to be low additional cost, or even reduce costs as the alternative technology costs are decreasing.

    In my opinion, the WA state government urgently has to engage in a conversation that takes the WA electricity supply in a direction that is fit for this century of low emissions, decentralisation and sustainable energy inputs.

Get up to 3 quotes from pre-vetted solar (and battery) installers.